Where the parties' experts utilized the same methodology to analyze the subject motor vehicle accident but disagreed on their final conclusions, there was no indication that plaintiff's expert used methodologies that were contrary to the generally accepted practices in the field of accident reconstruction. Motion to exclude denied.
October 02, 2012 at 12:00 AM
1 minute read
EVIDENCE
Expert Witnesses Accident Reconstruction Frye Motion Battle of Experts
Pandice v. Kowalczyk, PICS Case No. 12-1816 (C.P. Lawrence Sept. 10, 2012) Piccione, J. (16 pages).
Presented by BigVoodoo
The Legal Intelligencer honors lawyers leaving a mark on the legal community in Pennsylvania and Delaware.
This conference aims to help insurers and litigators better manage complex claims and litigation.
Recognizing innovation in the legal technology sector for working on precedent-setting, game-changing projects and initiatives.
The New Jersey State Commission of Investigation (SCI) is seeking an experienced and visionary leader to serve as its next Executive Directo...
We are a boutique firm specializing the area of real estate law and handling both litigation and transactional matters. We are seeking an as...
Rabb, Hamill, P.A, located in Woodbridge, NJ, seeks an experienced NJ licensed Personal Injury Trial attorney. The successful candidate wi...
